Article Comments - 2009 Ford Flex First Look / First Drive / Full Test

66 messages, Last post on Feb 26, 2009 at 6:29 PM

You are in the Ford Flex Forum. Your Host is kcram

What is this discussion about? Ford Flex, Wagon

First Look: 2009 Ford Flex - The 2009 Ford Flex might be another crossover, but at least it's not boring. (more)

First Drive: 2009 Ford Flex - First Impressions: If you like the look of the Flex, there's nothing in the way that it functions that should prevent you from getting it. (more)

Full Test: 2009 Ford Flex Limited AWD - Bottom Line: As everyday transportation, it's the best, most comfortable Ford you can buy. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 4 of 8: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; Prev; Next; Last

#24 of 66 Re: First drive available! [KarenS] by bobw3 Jun 16, 2008 (1:14 pm)
Replying to: KarenS (Jun 16, 2008 11:11 am) sort of strange to me to see so little interest in a new vehicle like the Flex. Nobody is talking about it.
#25 of 66 A clean miss by crowcanada Jun 16, 2008 (1:27 pm)
For those that need the space, the Flex is a poor substitute for a minivan. However much "space" you think you've got in there, it gets drubbed where it counts by virtually every minivan out there. If, on the other hand, you need a 'ute (and there's very few people that do but my in-laws actually qualify), this won't cut it either. Bottom line, most "CUV's" are a bad idea, and this seems to be a particularly poor example of a bad breed. I'm sure there are a large selection of people who will go for the unique (ugly) look, (I like the coffin comment) or will buy into the gimmicks (fridge, ridiculous oversized tires, glass roof) but Ford is just putting a new exclamation point on their run of mistakes. Its mileage isn't great, which is a real liability in an era of ever rising fuel prices, the oversized tires just mean a massive bill to replace them someday, excessive price, and limited cargo capacity. Overall, the Flex just doesn't have anything obviously redeeming about it. The best I can suggest is to paint it black and it might make a good hearse. Don't know if the additional height over an old Caddy would be a benefit or a curse. If I'm the guy to whom Ford wanted to market this new thing (middle aged, three kids + dog + trailer), they couldn't have failed much more spectacularly. I showed a picture of it to my wife and she threatened me with a loss of select anatomical protuberances if I even considered buying it. Looking back at other Ford misses, the Freestar wasn't enough better than a Windstar to be a success, let alone better than the competition. I liked my '99 Windstar, my fourth Ford, but its shortcomings in cargo capacity, passenger comfort, raucous powertrain, continuous run of repairs, and poor mileage became more glaring every year. The Freestar solved few, if any, of these issues, and was actually a step backwards in many areas. The last good, sensible Ford vehicle was the Focus wagon - and Ford killed that off last year. Great mileage, good performance, unbeatable space and capacity in its market segment. Every person I know who has one loves it, including the guy with the 2000 year model and the umpteen recalls, none of which was for anything major, in his opinion. Mind you, their's are all older Foci with the old Escort 2.0L engine - unsophisticated but absolutely bulletproof. In fairness, I like the look of the Fusion, but is it enough better than the competition to beat them? (I will give the edge on looks to the Fusion over the new Accord and Camry; you can only buy those two with your eyes shut.) As a Canadian, I swallow my disdain and hope fervently on behalf of all those Ford employees beavering away at building the Flex in Oakville that this vehicle succeeds. As a formerly loyal but now disgruntled Ford customer, I hope it fails so spectacularly that Ford may get the message that they need to build something good and useful and not keep trying to hit some vague style mark that won't sustain a market. My new Sienna may be bland, but it beats my old Windstar in every category that counts. Sorry Ford, the Flex is so far away from what I wanted that I didn't even bother to wait to check it out up close. Sliding doors may be mundane, but they're the most sensible ingress/egress method invented. Sorry this sort of devolved to a general rant, but I was so disappointed with the Flex. I wanted to like it and stick with Ford, and I even tried to drum up some enthusiasm for it, but I can't buy a vehicle that far off from what I want, and for what I want a minivan comes closest. Ford basically lost me as a customer with this vehicle. Once gone, I may never be back.
#26 of 66 Range Rover design Rip-off by kitko33 Jun 18, 2008 (5:32 pm)
Remember those times when Ford owned Range Rover? I seriously can't believe that I have yet to read a review that would mention the fact that Flex borrows too many lines and design cues from Range Rover. The form changed, sure, Range Rover is tall and boxy, Flex is long and boxy (on mighy say that this is the box Mazda CX-9 came in). But still, this is a Range Rover in different form. Replies to this message: bobw3 (Jun 19, 2008 5:29 am)
#27 of 66 Re: Range Rover design Rip-off [kitko33] by bobw3 Jun 19, 2008 (5:29 am)
Replying to: kitko33 (Jun 18, 2008 5:32 pm) Range Rover on the outside and Ford Freestyle on the inside.
#28 of 66 2009 Ford Flex Pricing by superbowl7 Jun 19, 2008 (7:19 pm)
My wife and I are in the market for a vehicle that has room for a family of 4, good gas mileage and roomy. We're not sold on a mini van or some of the SUVs. I came across the Ford Flex yesterday and love everything about it but the price. However, did anyone see the consumer rating for Ford Flex on edmunds.com? Check this out: http://www.edmunds.com/ford/flex/2009/consumerreview.html The rating says this guy bought a Ford Flex SEL with AWD and options for under 30k! Maybe it is a typo and it was supposed to be 40 k. We can afford < 30k so this caught my attention. The base model we can afford, but I would really like AWD (I live in Ohio). I can't get AWD on the base SE model So..anyone hear of any prices people are getting from the dealer? Is this legit? Replies to this message: rcf8000 (Jun 19, 2008 7:52 pm) bobw3 (Jun 20, 2008 5:44 am)
#29 of 66 Re: 2009 Ford Flex Pricing [superbowl7] by rcf8000 Jun 19, 2008 (7:52 pm)
Replying to: superbowl7 (Jun 19, 2008 7:19 pm) The MSRP of the Flex that the guy bought for less than $30K is about $42K, so there is no way he got it for what he said. Replies to this message: bobw3 (Jun 20, 2008 5:44 am)
#30 of 66 Re: 2009 Ford Flex Pricing [rcf8000] by bobw3 Jun 20, 2008 (5:44 am)
Replying to: rcf8000 (Jun 19, 2008 7:52 pm) I would say it's possible. The invoice price is in the mid-30s and he might have financed, had a trade, bought an extended warranty, etc...all of which might have led the dealer low the price of the car to $29K because the dealer made thousands off the trade-in, financing, etc. So while it's not likely, it's possible.
#31 of 66 Price and Concept by uofmg35 Jun 20, 2008 (12:04 pm)
Why is everyone complaining about price? Flex starts at $28,295. Compared to some key competitors, it fits just fine: Mazda CX-9 = $30,050 GMC Acadia = $30,470 Honda Pilot = $27,595 I will say that once you start optioning the Flex up, it does get incredibly pricey ($45K!!). If you can restrain yourself from getting all the frivolous options, you can have a Flex for under $30K. And why do people think they need AWD? FWD in a 4500 lb vehicle will do just fine in everything but blizzard conditions. If you're so concerned about price/fuel economy, just get FWD. Anyhow, I think the Flex is just what Ford needs... something fresh, that actually stands out in the segment. It has great interior room and nice materials/styling (for a Ford). It won't touch Highlander/Pilot sales numbers, but it should do better than the unloved Freestar it's intended to replace. Replies to this message: bobw3 (Jun 21, 2008 6:15 am)
#32 of 66 Flex is here by mattandi Jun 20, 2008 (9:47 pm)
Been waiting to see one is the flesh. A local dealer got some in yesterday, so I stopped by today. Didn't drive it, just looked it over. It is slightly taller than I expected. That's not bad, just different from expected. It is long so the pics mislead me a bit. This is one that folks will either love or hate. Doubt very seriously anyone will be lukewarm on this one. I like the presence and strong lines much more than the T-X. I would like to see one with a roof rack. They didn't have one. The third row feels slightly tighter than the T-X. Still plenty of room though. I fit just fine. All they had had the second row captains chairs. I would be more interested in the bench. Cockpit is very T-X like. Snug and appeared very functional and serviceable. Nothing untoward at first look. All in all I like it so far. I like the boxy, square look much more than the swoopy, curvy style of most other CUV's. When my wife returns from her trip we'll go drive one. I would like it more at a mid-20's price point. They had SE's and SEL's from about $29k to $36k. In line with the segment. We'll see what they actually start selling at.
#33 of 66 Re: Price and Concept [uofmg35] by bobw3 Jun 21, 2008 (6:15 am)
Replying to: uofmg35 (Jun 20, 2008 12:04 pm) As far as price, it's also competing against the Odyssey and Sienna (since Ford doesn't have a minvivan), both of which start in the mid 20s. Bottom line, it's going to sell on it's style and not much else.